Telangana High Court
WP/28317/2008 of Dr. K.I. Askari Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation on 29 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28317 of 2008 Between: Dr. K.I. Askari S/o. Khaja Hassanuddin M/s. J.B.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADAWRIT PETITION NO : 28317 of 2008
Between:
Dr. K.I. Askari S/o. Khaja Hassanuddin
M/s. J.B. National Hospital No.5-9-88/3 at Chapel Road, Opp. FatehMaidan Club Gate, Hyderabad.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep. by its Commissioner,Tank Bund, Hyderabad.
2 Executive Engineer, Project Division-I, Cirlce-8, MCH ParkingComplex, Abids,Complex, Abids, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.
3 Ali Imam S/o. Mir Mumtaj Alil
R/o. H.NO.5-9-88/B/1, Opp. Khan Lateef Khan Buildings, Chapel Road, Fateh Maidan, Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to to issue a writ, order or direction essentially one in the natureof Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondentsby directing the respondents to remove the rubbles and debris lying onthe common passage and to demolish the un authorised constructionwhich is causing very much inconvience to the patients of M/sJ.B.National Hospital and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MS.NASEEM ARA
Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SCFOR MCH 1,2,4&6
The Court made the following :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The petitioner is the absolute owner and Director of thehospital by name J.B.National Hospital, situated at No.5-9-88/3 atChapel Road, opposite Fateh Maidan Club Gate, Hyderabad. According to him, the said hospital was constructed in the year1969, after obtaining necessary permission. However, when the 3[rd]respondent, who is his neighbour, submitted a plan for the purpose ofconstruction of a house, the petitioner raised an objection and in thelight of the said objection, the 3[rd] respondent was permitted to submita revised plan. However, without notice to the petitioner, the saidrevised plan was approved vide permit No.127/14 to construct aresidential house consisting of ground floor, part of first floor and partof second floor in the year 2006. As the said construction is to bebrought out by demolishing the old structure, the said old structurewas demolished on account of which rubbles and debris are lying onthe common passage. On account of the same, the petitioner as wellas the patients coming to the hospital felt inconvenienced and in thelight of the same, the petitioner approached respondent Nos. 1 and 2and gave number of representations on 19.4.2006, 25.3.2008,21.5.2008, 27.6.2006 and 19.11.2008. However, no action has beeninitiated. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court and filed thepresent writ petition.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well asthe learned Standing Counsel for Grater Hyderabad MunicipalCorporation, this Court is of the view that the usual notice to theunofficial respondents can be dispensed with and this writ petitioncan be disposed of at the stage of admission.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations given by thepetitioner on various dates and pass necessary orders. However, asthis Court is dispensing with the usual notice to the 3[rd] respondent,respondents No.1 and 2 shall put the 3[rd] respondent on notice beforepassing any orders.
rkk
_________29-12-2008